daddia Cascade
When to use
OKR cycle owners cascading objectives/KRs down levels — with contribution, capacity, alignment, and cross-team conflict checks naive cascades skip.
What this skill does not do
- Does not draft objectives — route to
/okr:draft-objectives. - Does not write KRs — route to
/okr:write-key-results. - Does not set targets — route to
/okr:set-targets.
Preconditions
| Input | If missing |
|---|---|
| Parent objectives/KRs to cascade | Ask user to provide |
| Practice profile (cascade levels, ceilings) | Proceed with defaults (3–5 objectives, 2–5 KRs); flag [review] |
| Child-level draft objectives/KRs | Ask user to provide or offer to draft via other skills |
Provisional mode
Without org structure data: fan-out/capacity check labeled [review]; cross-team conflict check still runs on provided KRs.
Trust spine
- Confidence bands (
structured-aggregation):- High: MECE cascade coverage, contribution tests complete, conflicts named.
- Medium: Some restatements or coverage gaps flagged.
- Low: Parent KRs missing or child set incomplete — scaffold only.
- Failure modes:
- Strategic advice vs. support: Flags restatements and conflicts; does not resolve ownership disputes.
- Client confidentiality: OKR content may be internal-only — CONFIDENTIAL header.
- Accountability gap: Cross-team conflicts surfaced for conversation, not silently merged.
- Analytical Rigor: Contribution test MECE; orphans and uncovered parents listed.
- Incentive Gaming: Catches cross-team KR pairs that game one metric at another's expense.
- Escalation triggers: Overloaded fan-out on single parent KR — flag parent KR too broad.
Workflow
- Read the practice profile for cascade levels and objectives/KR ceilings.
- Run contribution test on every cascaded objective — does achieving it move the parent KR?
- Run restatement check — contribution vs. same goal with different owner.
- Run alignment/coverage check — orphaned KRs and uncovered parent KRs.
- Run fan-out/capacity check — too many children on one parent KR.
- Run cross-team conflict check — sibling KRs that improve one team at another's expense.
- Completeness check before output.
Output format
CONFIDENCE: [defensible recommendation | structured first pass]
PARENT: [objective/KR]
→ [Child objective, owner] — Contribution: [genuine / restatement — explain]
→ [Child objective, owner] — Contribution: ...
FAN-OUT CHECK: [parent]: [N] children — [within plausible capacity / overloaded, explain]
ALIGNMENT CHECK:
Orphaned KRs (no upward contribution): [...]
Uncovered parent KRs (no cascaded contribution): [...]
CROSS-TEAM CONFLICT CHECK:
[Team A's KR] vs. [Team B's KR]: [nature of the conflict, or "none found"]
Worked example
Input: Parent KR "Reduce enterprise churn to 8%." Child A: "Ship onboarding v2"; Child B: "Slow release cadence for QA depth."
Expected output (excerpt):
PARENT: Reduce enterprise churn to 8%
→ Ship onboarding v2 (Product) — Contribution: restatement — output-shaped, not churn-linked [review]
→ Improve 90-day retention cohort by 5pts (Product) — Contribution: genuine
CROSS-TEAM CONFLICT CHECK:
Product release-cadence KR vs. Platform stability KR: speed vs. quality tension on shared customers [review]
Quality checks before delivering
- Contribution test on every child objective
- Orphans and uncovered parents listed
- Fan-out/capacity assessed
- Cross-team conflict check run across siblings
- Output does not read as approved cascade
Propose profile update
When a stable convention surfaces during this run (thresholds, naming, tone, output format, or recurring corrections), propose a profile update: show the exact diff against ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-strategy/okr/CLAUDE.md (org-wide facts go to org-profile.md), ask for confirmation, and write only on yes. Only /okr:practice-setup auto-applies a full profile write.
Outputs
Follows plugin CLAUDE.md § Outputs. Next: revise children via draft-objectives/write-key-results, or escalate conflicts to leadership.